Compare Stocks

5 / 10
Try these comparisons:

Stock Comparison

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO

Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.

Live fundamentals10-year financials5-year price chart
CCGWW
Cheche Group Inc. Warrant

Software - Application

TechnologyNASDAQ • CN
Market Cap$9M
5Y Perf.-89.5%
LMND
Lemonade, Inc.

Insurance - Property & Casualty

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$4.18B
5Y Perf.+646.4%
ROOT
Root, Inc.

Insurance - Property & Casualty

Financial ServicesNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$798M
5Y Perf.+553.3%
ACMR
ACM Research, Inc.

Semiconductors

TechnologyNASDAQ • US
Market Cap$3.92B
5Y Perf.+221.0%
HIPO
Hippo Holdings Inc.

Insurance - Specialty

Financial ServicesNYSE • US
Market Cap$714M
5Y Perf.+273.9%

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO — Key Financials

Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.

Company Snapshot
CCGWW logoCCGWW
LMND logoLMND
ROOT logoROOT
ACMR logoACMR
HIPO logoHIPO
IndustrySoftware - ApplicationInsurance - Property & CasualtyInsurance - Property & CasualtySemiconductorsInsurance - Specialty
Market Cap$9M$4.18B$798M$3.92B$714M
Revenue (TTM)$3.47B$821M$1.56B$901M$480M
Net Income (TTM)$-61M$-139M$56M$94M$113M
Gross Margin4.6%47.6%17.9%44.4%40.5%
Operating Margin-1.9%-16.3%4.1%12.1%24.2%
Forward P/E29.0x29.7x114.3x
Total Debt$35M$182M$201M$303M$52M
Cash & Equiv.$117M$385M$690M$766M$250M

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPOLong-Term Stock Performance

Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.

CCGWW
LMND
ROOT
ACMR
HIPO
StockSep 23Feb 26Return
Cheche Group Inc. W… (CCGWW)10010.5-89.5%
Lemonade, Inc. (LMND)100746.4+646.4%
Root, Inc. (ROOT)100653.3+553.3%
ACM Research, Inc. (ACMR)100321.0+221.0%
Hippo Holdings Inc. (HIPO)100373.9+273.9%

Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.

Quick Verdict: CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO

Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.

Bottom line: ACMR and HIPO are tied at the top with 2 categories each (5-stock set) — the right choice depends on your priorities. Hippo Holdings Inc. is the stronger pick specifically for profitability and margin quality and operational efficiency and capital deployment. CCGWW, LMND, and ROOT also each lead in at least one category. This set spans 2 sectors — these stocks serve different portfolio roles, not just different price points.
CCGWW
Cheche Group Inc. Warrant
The Income Pick

CCGWW ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.

  • beta 1.38
  • Lower volatility, beta 1.38, Low D/E 9.9%, current ratio 1.34x
  • Beta 1.38, current ratio 1.34x
  • Beta 1.38 vs ACMR's 3.24, lower leverage
Best for: income & stability and sleep-well-at-night
LMND
Lemonade, Inc.
The Insurance Pick

LMND is the clearest fit if your priority is growth.

  • 40.2% revenue growth vs CCGWW's 5.2%
Best for: growth
ROOT
Root, Inc.
The Insurance Pick

ROOT is the clearest fit if your priority is growth exposure.

  • Rev growth 29.0%, EPS growth 22.4%, 3Y rev CAGR 69.6%
  • Lower P/E (29.0x vs 29.7x)
Best for: growth exposure
ACMR
ACM Research, Inc.
The Long-Run Compounder

ACMR has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in long-term compounding.

  • 30.7% 10Y total return vs LMND's -21.6%
  • 0.2% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
  • +195.6% vs ROOT's -59.3%
Best for: long-term compounding
HIPO
Hippo Holdings Inc.
The Insurance Pick

HIPO is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.

  • 23.4% margin vs LMND's -16.9%
  • 6.0% ROA vs LMND's -7.4%, ROIC 22.8% vs -36.8%
Best for: quality and efficiency
See the full category breakdown
CategoryWinnerWhy
GrowthLMND logoLMND40.2% revenue growth vs CCGWW's 5.2%
ValueROOT logoROOTLower P/E (29.0x vs 29.7x)
Quality / MarginsHIPO logoHIPO23.4% margin vs LMND's -16.9%
Stability / SafetyCCGWW logoCCGWWBeta 1.38 vs ACMR's 3.24, lower leverage
DividendsACMR logoACMR0.2% yield; 3-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
Momentum (1Y)ACMR logoACMR+195.6% vs ROOT's -59.3%
Efficiency (ROA)HIPO logoHIPO6.0% ROA vs LMND's -7.4%, ROIC 22.8% vs -36.8%

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO — Revenue Breakdown by Segment

How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units

CCGWWCheche Group Inc. Warrant
FY 2023
Other Segments
100.0%$1M
LMNDLemonade, Inc.
FY 2025
Reportable Segment
100.0%$738M
ROOTRoot, Inc.

Segment breakdown not available.

ACMRACM Research, Inc.
FY 2025
Total Single Wafer and Semi-Critical Cleaning Equipment
69.5%$626M
ECP Front End And Packaging Furnace And Other Technologies
22.1%$200M
Advanced Packaging (exclude ECP), Services & Spares
8.4%$76M
HIPOHippo Holdings Inc.
FY 2024
Services Segment
100.0%$48M

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO — Financial Metrics

Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.

BEST OVERALLHIPOLAGGINGLMND

Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)

HIPO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

CCGWW is the larger business by revenue, generating $3.5B annually — 7.2x HIPO's $480M. HIPO is the more profitable business, keeping 23.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LMND's -16.9%. On growth, LMND holds the edge at +55.0% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
RevenueTrailing 12 months$3.5B$821M$1.6B$901M$480M
EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax-$121M$73M$126M$116M
Net IncomeAfter-tax profit-$139M$56M$94M$113M
Free Cash FlowCash after capex$20M$181M-$69M$50M
Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue+4.6%+47.6%+17.9%+44.4%+40.5%
Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue-1.9%-16.3%+4.1%+12.1%+24.2%
Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue-1.8%-16.9%+3.6%+10.4%+23.4%
FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue-3.3%+2.4%+11.6%-7.6%+10.4%
Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+55.0%+12.6%+9.4%+10.2%
EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year+45.3%+95.3%-76.1%+114.1%
HIPO leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Valuation Metrics

ROOT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

At 12.4x trailing earnings, HIPO trades at a 71% valuation discount to ACMR's 43.2x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ROOT's 5.9x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than ACMR's 27.5x.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
Market CapShares × price$9M$4.2B$798M$3.9B$714M
Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash-$3M$4.0B$309M$3.5B$517M
Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS-23.67x25.41x43.21x12.36x
Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est.29.04x29.68x114.33x
PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate1.22x
EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple5.88x27.49x8.16x
Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue0.02x5.67x0.53x4.35x1.52x
Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share0.18x7.33x2.47x2.06x1.64x
Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF4.15x78.49x
ROOT leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.

Profitability & Efficiency

HIPO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

HIPO delivers a 27.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $27 in annual profit, vs $-27 for LMND. CCGWW carries lower financial leverage with a 0.10x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to ROOT's 0.51x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ROOT scores 6/9 vs ACMR's 2/9, reflecting solid financial health.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
ROE (TTM)Return on equity-16.7%-26.5%+15.4%+6.1%+27.4%
ROA (TTM)Return on assets-5.6%-7.4%+3.7%+3.9%+6.0%
ROICReturn on invested capital-22.8%-36.8%+7.0%+22.8%
ROCEReturn on capital employed-16.6%-22.7%+3.8%+6.6%+6.9%
Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–944625
Debt / EquityFinancial leverage0.10x0.34x0.51x0.16x0.12x
Net DebtTotal debt minus cash-$82M-$203M-$489M-$463M-$198M
Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets$117M$385M$690M$766M$250M
Total DebtShort + long-term debt$35M$182M$201M$303M$52M
Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense-79.41x1.86x20.44x
HIPO leads this category, winning 4 of 9 comparable metrics.

Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)

ACMR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

A $10,000 investment in ACMR five years ago would be worth $23,344 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $875 for CCGWW. Over the past 12 months, ACMR leads with a +195.6% total return vs ROOT's -59.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors ROOT at 117.4% vs CCGWW's -55.6% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
YTD ReturnYear-to-date-19.2%-28.3%-19.7%+31.9%-8.5%
1-Year ReturnPast 12 months-19.8%+78.2%-59.3%+195.6%+12.2%
3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-91.3%+234.7%+927.3%+487.9%+48.3%
5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-91.3%-31.2%-69.6%+133.4%-88.9%
10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends-91.3%-21.6%-88.3%+3065.8%-90.5%
CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return-55.6%+49.6%+117.4%+80.5%+14.0%
ACMR leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.

Risk & Volatility

Evenly matched — CCGWW and ACMR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

CCGWW is the less volatile stock with a 1.38 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than ACMR's 3.24 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. ACMR currently trades 82.6% from its 52-week high vs ROOT's 34.9% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 5001.38x2.75x2.30x3.24x1.40x
52-Week HighHighest price in past year$0.05$99.90$162.99$71.65$38.98
52-Week LowLowest price in past year$0.02$28.71$40.91$19.26$19.92
% of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak+42.0%+54.5%+34.9%+82.6%+70.4%
RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–10039.136.356.660.748.9
Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded01.9M330K1.2M110K
Evenly matched — CCGWW and ACMR each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.

Analyst Outlook

Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.

Analyst consensus: LMND as "Buy", ROOT as "Hold", ACMR as "Buy", HIPO as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 33.5% upside for LMND (target: $73) vs -32.4% for ACMR (target: $40). ACMR is the only dividend payer here at 0.19% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.

MetricCCGWW logoCCGWWCheche Group Inc.…LMND logoLMNDLemonade, Inc.ROOT logoROOTRoot, Inc.ACMR logoACMRACM Research, Inc.HIPO logoHIPOHippo Holdings In…
Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sellBuyHoldBuyBuy
Price TargetConsensus 12-month target$72.67$75.00$40.00$28.38
# AnalystsCovering analysts1514106
Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price+0.2%
Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises3
Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS$0.11
Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap0.0%0.0%0.0%+0.2%+2.0%
Insufficient data to determine a leader in this category.
Key Takeaway

HIPO leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). ROOT leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.

Best OverallHippo Holdings Inc. (HIPO)Leads 2 of 6 categories
Loading custom metrics...

CCGWW vs LMND vs ROOT vs ACMR vs HIPO: Key Questions Answered

10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily

01

Is CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO a better buy right now?

For growth investors, Lemonade, Inc.

(LMND) is the stronger pick with 40. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 5. 2% for Cheche Group Inc. Warrant (CCGWW). Hippo Holdings Inc. (HIPO) offers the better valuation at 12. 4x trailing P/E (114. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Lemonade, Inc. (LMND) a "Buy" — based on 15 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

02

Which has the better valuation — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

On trailing P/E, Hippo Holdings Inc.

(HIPO) is the cheapest at 12. 4x versus ACM Research, Inc. at 43. 2x. On forward P/E, Root, Inc. is actually cheaper at 29. 0x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

03

Which is the better long-term investment — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

Over the past 5 years, ACM Research, Inc.

(ACMR) delivered a total return of +133. 4%, compared to -91. 3% for Cheche Group Inc. Warrant (CCGWW). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: ACMR returned +30. 7% versus CCGWW's -91. 3%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

04

Which is safer — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Cheche Group Inc.

Warrant (CCGWW) is the lower-risk stock at 1. 38β versus ACM Research, Inc. 's 3. 24β — meaning ACMR is approximately 134% more volatile than CCGWW relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Cheche Group Inc. Warrant (CCGWW) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 10% versus 51% for Root, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

05

Which is growing faster — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

By revenue growth (latest reported year), Lemonade, Inc.

(LMND) is pulling ahead at 40. 2% versus 5. 2% for Cheche Group Inc. Warrant (CCGWW). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Hippo Holdings Inc. grew EPS 235. 4% year-over-year, compared to -10. 5% for ACM Research, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, ROOT leads at 69. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

06

Which has better profit margins — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

Hippo Holdings Inc.

(HIPO) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 3% net margin versus -22. 4% for Lemonade, Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 3% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: HIPO leads at 13. 5% versus -21. 8% for LMND. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — HIPO leads at 50. 9%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

07

Is CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO more undervalued right now?

On forward earnings alone, Root, Inc.

(ROOT) trades at 29. 0x forward P/E versus 114. 3x for Hippo Holdings Inc. — 85. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for LMND: 33. 5% to $72. 67.

08

Which pays a better dividend — CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO?

In this comparison, ACMR (0.

2% yield) pays a dividend. CCGWW, LMND, ROOT, HIPO do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

09

Is CCGWW or LMND or ROOT or ACMR or HIPO better for a retirement portfolio?

For long-horizon retirement investors, Cheche Group Inc.

Warrant (CCGWW) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding. Root, Inc. (ROOT) carries a higher beta of 2. 30 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CCGWW: -91. 3%, ROOT: -88. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

10

What are the main differences between CCGWW and LMND and ROOT and ACMR and HIPO?

These companies operate in different sectors (CCGWW (Technology) and LMND (Financial Services) and ROOT (Financial Services) and ACMR (Technology) and HIPO (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.

In terms of investment character: CCGWW is a small-cap quality compounder stock; LMND is a small-cap high-growth stock; ROOT is a small-cap high-growth stock; ACMR is a small-cap high-growth stock; HIPO is a small-cap high-growth stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.

Find Stocks Like These

Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.

Stocks Like

CCGWW

Quality Business

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

LMND

High-Growth Disruptor

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 27%
  • Gross Margin > 28%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

ROOT

Quality Business

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 6%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

ACMR

Steady Growth Compounder

  • Sector: Technology
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 6%
Run This Screen
Stocks Like

HIPO

Quality Mega-Cap Compounder

  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Market Cap > $100B
  • Revenue Growth > 5%
  • Net Margin > 14%
Run This Screen
Custom Screen

Beat Both

Find stocks that outperform CCGWW and LMND and ROOT and ACMR and HIPO on the metrics below

Revenue Growth>
%
(CCGWW: 5.2% · LMND: 55.0%)

You Might Also Compare

Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.